Posted: December 7th, 2014

Order Description

Discussion

The discussion question for this module is posted on the Discussion Board.

•Post an initial response and then post responses to your classmates.

•Be sure to review the Discussion Guidelines in the Course Home menu before posting

my.saintleo.edu
login: sitou.annam
password!7
course: Intro to Law and Legal System POL-123-DL01.
module 7 to find the NBC learn go to module 7 course please

Explore

Click here to view a video at NBC Learn exploring civil liability for obesity.

Do you think that obesity is a problem that can be solved through the legal process? What are the implications of litigating obesity?

Textbook:
Schubert, F. (2009). Introduction to law (custom). (9th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage. ISBN-13: 978-1-111-
07266-7;
American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. ISBN-13: 978-1-4338-0561-5; ISBN-10: 1-4338-0561-8

Post your initial response to the class .

Module 7 Discussion

Review the NBC Learns video from this module about obesity and civil liability. Construct a legal argument for either of the following:

• A plaintiff who is suing a fast food restaurant for negligence. Make sure you address the four necessary elements of negligence, and why you believe the restaurant is liable.

• The defense, arguing why a plaintiff cannot establish the necessary elements of negligence, or refuting plaintiff’s case based on defenses to negligence.

Respond to at least two of your classmates
Respond to 1 of your classmates

Mark as Unread Module 7 Justin Havens 12/4/2014 7:23:35 PM

Negligence has 2 definitions accoring to our text:

1: a felxible term for failure to use ordinary care, under the particular factual circumstances revelaed by the evidence in a lawsuit
2: conduct that falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm…does not include conduct recklessly in disregard of an interest of others.

In any case of someone trying to sue a restaurant for negligence they would first have to prove the it had any prior knowledge that the food it sells could directly cause obesity. In most any case, it can be reasonably put forth that whomever is the one trying to sue the restaurant for negligence had the choice to eat there or not. The fact that someone suing made the choice to eat there makes it their own responsibilty if they were to become obese.

Schubert, F. (2009). Glossary. In Introduction to Law (p. 696). Mason, Ohio: Cengage Learning.

Respond to at least two of your classmates .

Mark as Unread Tom’s Mode 7 Answers Thomas Strickland 12/4/2014 5:15:08 PM

Review the NBC Learns video from this module about obesity and civil liability. Construct a legal argument for either of the following:

• A plaintiff who is suing a fast food restaurant for negligence. Make sure you address the four necessary elements of negligence, and why you believe the restaurant is liable.

• The defense, arguing why a plaintiff cannot establish the necessary elements of negligence, or refuting plaintiff’s case based on defenses to negligence

In my book and notes there are 4 elements that you have to have to establish NEGLIGENCE (Page 405) and in the modes’ Lecture Notes.

#1: “A duty or standard of care recognized by the law.” The defendant should owe you a duty of care, which arises when there is a certain relationship between you and ______. Because of this relationship, ________ is required to be careful with is actions in order to protect you from harm. For example, a driver you encountered on the road is required to follow traffic rules to avoid the occurrence of a collision. In the case of the Fast Food Industry, outside the grounds of poison or food that was intentionally made to make you sick to cause harm. I do not see how they showed any negligence if the fact no one forced anyone to eat there seven days a week.

#2: “A breach of the duty or failure to exercise the requisite care.” The defendant will ______ held liable for your injures if ______ breached this duty. You will be able to establish this element by showing that the defendant failed to exert reasonable care while ________was trying to fulfill his duty. In case of the Fast Food Industry, the only “duty” it promises its’ customers is to provide a service and a product that will not harm you right then and there. In this and all of them the PLAINTIFF has the burden of proving through the presentation of evidence that the defendant was negligent (Page 405).

#3: “The occurrence of harm.” You should show that the accident and your injuries are caused by the defendants’ negligence. In addition, it should be proven that you will not be injured if ____was careful with_____ actions. In the case of the Fast Food Industry, unless it’s a physical accident (Example https://news.aitkenlaw.com/verdicts-settlements/playground-brain-injury/)

[The Plaintiff, Jacob B., age 10, fell from the cross bars of the playground at a national fast food burger chain restaurant and suffered a severe, traumatic brain injury when his head struck the restaurant floor tile. Due to the severity of the fall, Jacob will require 24 hour life time care. While Defendants argued that the cross bars were not part of the play structure, Plaintiff was able to establish through intensive discovery that the cross bars resembled and were repeatedly used by prior customers as public playground “monkey bars” and discovered a serious prior injury at the same location. In addition, there were reasonable means to prevent access to the bars and the flooring below the bars lacked proper padding. Isabelle B., age 5, Plaintiff’s sister, brought a case for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress since she witnessed the incident to her brother, “Jake”.]

Now here is a case where the Fast Food Industry in question WAS proven Negligence; but, it didn’t have anything to do with the food.

#4: “Proximate cause & Damages.” It covers the scope of the defendant’s liability in the case. ___ will only be responsible for the effects of ____actions which ____ can foresee. You need to show that the defendant’s failure to act reasonably caused actual damages.

In the case of the Fast Food Industry, this would be a case where you were choking and no one came to help you. The only cases I could find were cases involving the toys from the kids’ meals, not from the food.

The most publicized lawsuit to date, Pelman v. McDonald’s, was brought on behalf of children who consumed McDonald’s products and allegedly became obese or overweight and developed diabetes, coronary heart disease, high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol intake, or other health effects as a result. Although it was recently dismissed, the case provides a good lens through which to consider the arguments for holding the fast-food industry accountable for obesity-related health harms.

The Pelman plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s had engaged in deceptive advertising, sales, and promotion; produced food that was unreasonably unsafe; and failed to warn consumers of the dangers of its products. The complaint alleged that McDonald’s knew or should have known that its actions would exacerbate obesity and its associated health problems in millions of American children.

The plaintiff’s attorney in Pelman had previously filed a similar lawsuit against McDonald’s and several other fast-food chains on behalf of a class of adults represented by Caesar Barber, a fifty-six-year-old New York City maintenance worker who had been eating fast food several times a week for more than twenty-five years. That complaint’s legal architecture foreshadowed Pelman, but the plaintiff’s lawyer withdrew the case to pursue Pelman, whose child plaintiffs were no doubt seen as more powerful representatives of the “afflicted” population.

Work Cited: https://www.healthaffairs.org/

Southern California Personal Injury Lawyer

Word Count: 855

Course Discussion and Participation The following is a provided rubric for you to use to assess your participation. Please take the time throughout the course to check and see where your participation level falls.
It is recommended you review this early in the course to see what is expected of you, and then again near Module 4 so you can judge for yourself just how well you have been doing. Please feel free to use it as often as you feel necessary. This document is for your use, so you know what is expected of you and how your instructor will be grading you.
Level 4
? Provides concrete examples from the readings to support postings
? Integrates prior readings in postings
? Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate and highly insightful way
? Presents new observations
? Constructively responds to classmates’ postings
? Participates in all module discussions
? Posts are organized and information is presented in a logical sequence
? Word choice and sentence structure are suitable
Level 3
? Refers to examples from the readings to support postings
? Integrates personal observations and knowledge in an accurate way
? Presents new observations
? Constructively responds to classmates’ postings
? Participates in all module discussions
? Posts are organized, and information is presented in a logical sequence
? Word choice and sentence structure are suitable
Level 2
? Alludes to the readings to support postings
? Integrates personal observations and knowledge in a cursory manner
? Does not present new observations
? Constructively responds to classmates’ postings
? Posts are somewhat disorganized and information is not presented in a logical sequence
? Word choice and sentence structure are not suitable
Level 1
? Does not refer to the readings to support postings
? Does not integrate personal observations or knowledge
? Does not present new observations
? Responds in a cursory manner to classmates’ postings
? Posts are disorganized and information is not presented in a logical sequence
? Word choice and sentence structure are not suitable.

I recognize that the practice of law is a profession and the essence of professionalism is personal integrity. I owe a duty to my clients, the courts, the legal community and the public to conduct myself as a professional. Professionalism extends beyond the code of professional responsibility. The responsibilities of professionalism demand truthfulness and honesty in all dealings and demand that I treat others with respect and dignity. I will conduct myself according to the following creed:
I owe the duty of utmost faith and loyalty to my clients and I will perform that duty to the best of my ability, but I will not permit zealousness in the representation of my clients to interfere with my ability to provide objective, realistic and independent advice.
I will pursue the lawful objectives of my client as expeditiously and economically as possible. I will advise my client against pursuing, and I will not pursue, interests that are frivolous or otherwise without merit.
I will advise my client not to pursue tactics which are intended to delay resolution of a dispute or to unduly burden the financial resources of the opposing party. I will endeavor to be punctual in attending all negotiations, legal proceedings and other scheduled events.
I will counsel my client that a willingness to initiate and engage in settlement discussions is consistent with zealous and effective representation. I will endeavor to keep my client informed of all important points concerning the matter for which I am engaged.
I will be candid in all communications with respect to both facts and the law.
I will be courteous and civil in all communications with opposing counsel recognizing that the disputes are those of the clients. Moreover, I will advise my client that civility and courtesy are not signs of weakness.
I will provide documents to, and otherwise communicate with, counsel for other parties at a time or in a manner which will not unfairly restrict an opportunity to respond. I will also attempt to accommodate the schedule of counsel for other parties when arranging depositions, hearings, meetings or other events when the legitimate interests of my client will not be affected.
I will not attack the integrity or professionalism of counsel for other parties except in connection with a lawful proceeding concerning such matters.
I recognize that discovery is an essential part of litigation, but I also recognize that discovery can be time consuming and costly for all parties. Therefore, with respect to discovery:
a. I will confer with opposing counsel and attempt to agree upon a plan for the orderly exchange of information and orderly discovery proceedings;
b. I will attempt to resolve discovery disputes with opposing counsel prior to filing any motion with the Court;
c. I will advise my client to comply with all reasonable discovery requests.
I will not make changes to written documents under negotiation in a manner which is calculated to cause any party or counsel to overlook the change.
I will strongly urge an unrepresented party to seek counsel when engaged in litigation or transactions on behalf of my client(s) or for my own account.
I will refrain from taking unfair advantage of clear and obvious mistakes made by counsel for other parties in administering matters which are already clearly agreed upon.
I will act to keep the legal system free from all forms of wrongful discrimination.
I recognize that professionalism mandates a commitment to community service and to assuring that legal services are made available to persons unable to afford legal representation.
I will endeavor to enhance the image of the profession in the eyes of the public.
Revised June 1996

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂